Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

BREAKING NEWS: airliner missing within Egyptian FIR

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

BREAKING NEWS: airliner missing within Egyptian FIR

Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:37
  #321 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,919
That's a very red herring, Ian W. ; A321 flaps, ailerons and spoilers are of composites. Even if they'd been made of paper mâché it wouldn't explain this accident
ShotOne is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:41
  #322 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bedford, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 1,245
Machinbird, why would the rear fuselage disintegrate under inertial and aerodynamic loads? Break apart yes, but would you not expect to see large sections?
Mr Optimistic is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:44
  #323 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,348
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
That's a very red herring, Ian W. ; A321 flaps, ailerons and spoilers are of composites. Even if they'd been made of paper mâché it wouldn't explain this accident
Other people are not so laisse faire and sanguine about such problems.

Letter to NTSB regarding AA 587 - Airline Pilot Central Forums

But I know that you won't let anything concern you.
Ian W is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:47
  #324 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: under the sea
Posts: 2,398
The rear fuselage would contain most of the baggage but it is also where an ACT ( additional centre fuel tank) would be located if fitted..
From the photographs currently released we have not yet seen many of the heavy items, such as the main landing gear, complete engines and the horizontal stab.

Last edited by tubby linton; 1st Nov 2015 at 20:06.
tubby linton is online now  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 20:21
  #325 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: CarrotLand
Posts: 693
Originally Posted by tubby linton View Post
From the photographs currently released we have not yet seen many of the heavy items, such as the main landing gear, complete engines and the horizontal stab.
From a previous link, if you look at the foreground, the landing gear can be seen (actually only the rims) consistent with a retracted position
Tiennetti is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 20:34
  #326 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: YARM
Age: 70
Posts: 124
unworry is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 20:52
  #327 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Estonia
Posts: 75
Heat damage before breakup?

If we assume that this piece of wreckage was not moved after crash, then does it mean that this heat damage happened before breakup?
Prada is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:00
  #328 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
You would expect an in flight fire to cause fore-aft scorching rather than along the wing. Mark's like this would be impossible in flight. Where are the smoke marks aft of the fire?
VinRouge is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:01
  #329 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alternate places
Age: 72
Posts: 97
unworry;

The photo is of either the outboard strake for eng.#2 or the inboard strake for eng.#1, (right-hand side of either cowling). Some sooting can be seen on what is probably the lower/under side of the cowling part.
FDMII is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:02
  #330 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 186
Of course we are not sure but i have seen a few references to inflight fire, if it was a RPB blowout, surely you wouldn't expect a fire as well?

Also another RT video shows some close up of some of the weakage

logansi is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:10
  #331 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
You would with wings full of fuel and two donks spinning when it hit the deck. They don't shut down if they have a fuel supply, even if they lose control signals they keep going.

Most ground impacts, even vertical ones result in post crash fire, particularly with thirty tonnes of kerosene turned to a mist in a ground impact.
VinRouge is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:14
  #332 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 818
Originally Posted by logansi View Post
Of course we are not sure but i have seen a few references to inflight fire, if it was a RPB blowout, surely you wouldn't expect a fire as well?

You would expect a fire when the fuselage breaks up in the area of the Center tank as a consequence of the RPB collapse. Looking at the wreckage of the front half of the fuselage this could have been the case. Again not much difference in the expected pattern for a Bomb explosion or a RPB failure. We will have to wait for the crash investigators to exclude one or the other Scenario.
henra is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:29
  #333 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 47
This is either a complete coincidence or just another picture of the last airbus aircraft that have been lost at this kind of altitude. Any rear pressure bulkhead repairs that may have been carried out in the past (assuming previous posts are correct) would have been carried out in accordance with airbus and approved. Any damage outside of the structural repair manual is routed through airbus for an approved repair with approved inspection intervals. It is about time all these sofa based people with an Un educated opinion got a grip.
Interrogator is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:33
  #334 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 951
If we assume that this piece of wreckage was not moved after crash
From images already published I think it is safe to say a good deal of the wreckage has already been disturbed.
Sober Lark is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:48
  #335 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 11,589
Originally Posted by Interrogator View Post
Any rear pressure bulkhead repairs that may have been carried out in the past (assuming previous posts are correct) would have been carried out in accordance with airbus and approved.
Substitute "Boeing" for "Airbus" and that assumption could equally have been made (at the time of the repair) in respect of both the JAL 747SR and the Air China 747-200.

In both of those cases events proved otherwise.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:54
  #336 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 63
Posts: 287
Location

Interesting speculations about rear pressure bulkhead blowout, BUT,

on the pictures of the broken off tail section, don't you see a couple of doors behind the break line? Is the RPB not behind all doors, at the very end of the pressurized section?
EMIT is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 21:55
  #337 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 50
Posts: 811
Honestly I can't think of anything less transparent than a joint Russian-Egyptian investigation
Egyptian perhaps, but (Russian) MAK have a worldwide reputation and I would not for one second hesitate to accept their findings.
flash8 is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 22:04
  #338 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: between the lines
Age: 40
Posts: 11
What FR data permit to infer

Since graphic depiction guides a lot of interpretation, here an alternative (I have taken the liberty to modify peekay's (#200) graph).

In grey, the envelope for the data, darker where three stations, lighter grey where two.



For demonstration, added in yellow a - completely hypothetical - possible flight path that would be perfectly consistent with the given data.

The data tell that the aircraft was climbing first, and then descending (no surprise).

(note that the data is only what the onboard computers thought it was, not necessarily what it was (no matter how well -or rather not- synchronized); and we do not know how wide the "envelope" really should be).
KKN_ is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 22:04
  #339 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: hotels all over the globe
Posts: 52
The A321, is a longer A/C and its fuselage may be more sensible to structural damage after a very hard landing.
A previous hard landing was not reported and no one made a proper inspection.
ricfly744 is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 22:12
  #340 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MCT
Posts: 856
Aviation Herald reporting on the composition of the Investigating Team

The investigation

Egypt's Accident Investigation Commission opened an investigation. The Chairman stated, that preliminary facts point towards a technical failure.

The French BEA representing the state of manufacture have dispatched two investigators and 6 advisors to Egypt to join the investigation led by Egypt. Germany's BFU representing the state of construction joined the investigation with two investigators as well as did Russia's MAK representing the state of operator with four investigators.
Crash: Metrojet A321 over Sinai on Oct 31st 2015, disappeared from radar in climb over Sinai
Suzeman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.